RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Christian Doctrine



Message

rapturefish -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (2/26/2006 6:38:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mushhead

quote:

That being said, I believe certain things about this issue - I tend to believe that is quite likely that people who are Spirit baptised do speak in tongues, and that tongues is useful and effective in a way that natural prayer is not because it works not through the language of the mind but involves the Spirit communicating with God that doesn't involve natural speech. I have found this through time praying in both ways, though since Spirit-baptism I have also found that natural prayer has become bolder, more passionate and alive.


Now see, your creating a problem for some people because your too reasonable. There must be some value to praying in the Spirit or it would be senseless to impart a gift that creates the ability.


[;)] Yes, there is value in tongues. It edifies a person's spirit; it is useful for when people don't know how they ought to pray (I believe the Romans passage can be read as just groanings or tongues); having been edified in one's spirit the person is enabled to be bold in witness and empowered to live the christian life effectively.

Can all this be done without tongues? Possibly. But I've found that with tongues that these things happen every time after a session of praying in tongues, whereas with natural prayer it doesn't happen instantly with edification of one's self, and with natural prayer I do reach a point where sometimes I don't know how to pray and get stuck, e.g. if a person is very sick, do I pray for healing, or do I pray for a peaceful passing? If I let the Spirit intercede then it's better.

quote:

I don't speak in tongues personally, and no one in our church does, but we have incredible power in our prayers. In fact we spend time every time we get together marvelling at how God has been answering prayer. There is a 11 year old girl who's mother called me because she was staying up into the wee hours of the night praying for an infant who was going to die from a heart defect. The mother was becoming concerned for her daughters well being. I got the call late one night. I went over and spoke with the young girl. She told me God told her to pray. I told her then she should pray. Her mother didn't know what to think. I told her mom to have faith. The baby recovered. This is just one in a regular series of answered prayers. I'm not even sure it is the most amazing. I don't think that scripture or experience supports the notion that prayers are more powerful or personal if spoken by someone who is praying in tongues.


That's wonderful, God bless the intercessory impact your church is having. It's good to read of an expectant faith in a praying church and the things that God accomplishes through them. And it's totally valid and good and right. I don't believe your experience invalidates mine, neither does mine yours. The Holy Spirit is a person and relates with each individual in a unique way. I do agree that scripture is silent or very open regarding the effective of tongues vs natural prayer - I believe that the emphasis is more on the faith in that prayer, the righteousness of the pray-er, the role of the Holy Spirit's baptism on a believer's life. Tongues edifies the person and in church can be revelatory if interpreted - anything else we discover about tongues happens as people use it and find out.

quote:

However, rapturefish, I agree we shouldn't divide. You are reasonable. I think the division come over those who are not. They make those of us who don't speak in tongues out to be unsaved or not part of the true church. Those abuses reflect the reason Paul taught the subject to the Corinthians and why so many of non-tongue speaking christians get leary around those who do. Of course their are abusers on this side of the isle as well. I'm sure you've experienced that.


Although I have been on both sides, I think I've gotten off lightly when it comes to experiencing cold shoulders on the basis of the tongues issue. But I have read plenty on it, enough to be careful and to form a way of approaching the issue. The worst I had was when I revealed to a local pastor I was in a charismatic church while helping my old conservative church on a mission trip, since he asked about what church I came from. He seemed accepting. Then the next morning in big group devotions he talked about godliness and out came this sort of remark "I don't care if you speak in TONGUES, you need to pursue godliness." It's funny how that implies that tongues speakers don't know that speaking in tongues does not equal godliness, but for some reason I wasn't offended.

I think a good deal of the divide comes through fear of the unknown. I've been in meetings before receiving tongues myself where the odd person has prayed in tongues, supposedly to themselves - and it irked me because I couldn't concentrate and was totally unused to the whole phenomenon. Once I was more informed about the whole thing I could be at a charismatic church meet and not be put off by uses of tongues that I did hear (even when used privately sometimes you hear people if you're close enough).

People who do not speak in tongues but are christians are saved, and are no more or less mature than tongues-speakers on the basis of tongues, and vice versa. I have a number of old friends who I have a great deal of respect for because of the integrity and commitment of their walk with God - and a lot of them come from my old church, where (almost?) no-one speaks in tongues. I initially had a great desire to tell them about what I received and I did, and they were thankfully open enough to accept it; but none were really interested in pursuing it themselves. At first it was disappointing that virtually no-one really had the same enthusiasm or wanted to pursue the issue further; but I came to realise that people all have their own walk, and it's up to them to respond to things. And whether they choose to look into tongues more or simpy continue on their walk without doing so, it doesn't matter. As long as they are walking with God and are showing fruit in their lives I am happy for them.

I hope there comes a day when non tongues-speakers can worship side by side with tongues-speakers and not have a problem, not even aware of the differences because they are worshipping the same God, one who values them equally, tongues or no. And I do believe this is in the process of happening. My current church is technically Petnecostal, but aims to cater for those who are more charismatic and also those who are not. While the leadership mostly speak in tongues and find it useful it's not what we talk about a great deal - we focus more on things like purpose, destiny, the presence of God, etc. and focusing on christian discipleship. And on that everyone is of one mind.



jbbaab44 -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (2/27/2006 9:46:47 AM)

There is one statement that is stated by those who practice a prayer language. Just this sunday the pastor at my church just said it, "as i was walking in, I prayed in the Spirit". My response to that: Is there any other way to pray? Should we pray in anything but the Spirit? Why does it seem that these people can turn the spirit off and on? If we are always praying in the spirit as we should, then according to the prayer language supporters logic we should always be praying with a tongue. One might say that we are still suppose to practice self control around others. But then again, that statement goes against many prayer language supporters that say "not to quench the spirit" Do't quench the spirit but always be praying in the spirit is a logic that contradicts some prayer language supporters. To clarify, i believe in tongues but don't believe the prayer language and gift of tongues is separate.



mushhead -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (2/28/2006 10:41:47 AM)

quote:

For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. 1 Corinthians 12:13


Question: Does this verse also refer to Spirit baptism?



manwe -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (2/28/2006 11:56:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mushhead

quote:

For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. 1 Corinthians 12:13


Question: Does this verse also refer to Spirit baptism?



No, it is more in reference to salvation. 1 Cor 14:1ff however, show Paul's support for the use of speaking/praying in tongues in the life of a believer (note: nowhere in the NT does Paul oppose Luke nor does he bother to correct him).

The pneumatology of Paul and Luke worked in tandem with each other. Luke-Acts shows more the nature of Spirit Baptism from an empowerment view whereas Paul focuses in on the salvational aspects of the work of the Spirit. But there views of the Spirit are not in contadiction.

Hope this helps.



Justifiedbyfaith -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/2/2006 7:41:59 PM)

I always speak with my tongue. Unless I'm mumbling of course.[sm=hammerhead.gif]



rapturefish -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/3/2006 7:57:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbbaab44

There is one statement that is stated by those who practice a prayer language. Just this sunday the pastor at my church just said it, "as i was walking in, I prayed in the Spirit". My response to that: Is there any other way to pray? Should we pray in anything but the Spirit? Why does it seem that these people can turn the spirit off and on? If we are always praying in the spirit as we should, then according to the prayer language supporters logic we should always be praying with a tongue. One might say that we are still suppose to practice self control around others. But then again, that statement goes against many prayer language supporters that say "not to quench the spirit" Do't quench the spirit but always be praying in the spirit is a logic that contradicts some prayer language supporters. To clarify, i believe in tongues but don't believe the prayer language and gift of tongues is separate.


1 Corinthians 14:14ff
For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. What am I to do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will pray with my mind also; I will sing praise with my spirit, but I will sing with my mind also.

This suggests that praying in a tongue is to pray with one's spirit, and that this is different to praying with one's mind. Therefore one can pray by way of the mind, and one can also pray by way of their spirit, which is not by way of the mind, ie through tongues. It is interesting to note that it is one's spirit (small s) that prays but it is the Holy Spirit that enables it.



swsmiddy -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/3/2006 1:14:36 PM)

Here are some of my views on this. WHAT ARE YOURS?

***********************************************

Pursue love, and desire spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy. 2 For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries. 3 But he who prophesies speaks edification and exhortation and comfort to men. 4 He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church. 5 I wish you all spoke with tongues, but even more that you prophesied; for he who prophesies is greater than he who speaks with tongues, unless indeed he interprets, that the church may receive edification
NKJV

This section begins with instruction to desire spiritual gifts, but ESPECIALLY that you may prophesy.

The word “prophesy”, as stated in Matthew Henry’s Commentary, means “interpreting Scripture.”

The second verse states that he who speaks in a tongue DOES NOT speak to men but to God.

Verse 3 states that he who prophecies speaks edification, exhortation, and comfort to men.

Verse 4 Further states that “He who speaks in a tongue edifies HIMSELF, BUT HE WHO PROPHECIES (INTERPRETS SCRIPTURE) EDIFIES THE CHURCH.

Verse 5 tells us that Paul would that we all spoke with tongues, but EVEN MORE that we prophesied – for he who prophesies is GREATER THAN HE WHO SPEAKS WITH TONGUES, UNLESS INDEED HE INTERPRETS, THAT THE CHURCH MAY RECEIVE EDIFICATION.

This section of Scripture leads me to believe that speaking in tongues without interpretation is undesirable, for it does not edify the Church. Therefore, an outburst of someone speaking in tongues in the middle of a service, without interpretation, is OUT OF ORDER, whether someone says they are “praying in the spirit” or not, because without interpretation, they only edify themselves, and not the Church. Later in this chapter, Paul states that he would rather speak five words of understanding than ten thousand words in tongues, so that the Church may be edified.
*************************************************

Peace & Love in Him,

Sean



jbbaab44 -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/4/2006 8:53:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rapturefish
1 Corinthians 14:14ff
For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. What am I to do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will pray with my mind also; I will sing praise with my spirit, but I will sing with my mind also.

This suggests that praying in a tongue is to pray with one's spirit, and that this is different to praying with one's mind. Therefore one can pray by way of the mind, and one can also pray by way of their spirit, which is not by way of the mind, ie through tongues. It is interesting to note that it is one's spirit (small s) that prays but it is the Holy Spirit that enables it.

Missed my point totally. should you pray in anything but from our spirit OR Holy Spirit? And it sounds like his mind hinders the Holy Spirit by holding back tongues(the Holy Spirit praying for him). It is every word out of our mouth that has to be reinterpreted to God by the Holy Spirit anyways. Basically it is the Holy Spirit that enables all of our spirit's words to reach God. So what's the difference between: when we have the words to say, or as prayer languge people say: The holy Spirit has the words to say. because the HS has to reinterpret everything we say according to God's will anyways.

PS It is only God's word or the HS that gives us the words to pray, and unfortunately our mind cannot express back the words a HOLY SPIRIT or a HOLY BOOK gives us to say. Thank goodness for our mediator that intercedes all our words.



swsmiddy -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/4/2006 11:09:38 AM)

Just thought of a relevant verse. Unfortunately I can't remember or find the reference. BUT I know the essence of the verse itself:

Some things of the Spirit can only be said IN the Spirit. --->-- That was the jist of it. I'll try to find the reference and post it here sometime today.

Thanks.

In Him,

Sean



SmileyTish -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/4/2006 8:14:59 PM)

This is STILL going on? This being said from one of the original arguers...again. My opinion for those who are just joining in...

1. Tougues are for today, but not everyone has that gift.

2. Tougues are not a "springboard" to the other gifts (nothing in the New or Old Testements reveals that to me).

3. Instead of trying to get everyone to focus on that one gift, shouldn't the church be focusing on developing all the gifts that people do have?

Sorry, but I have a lot of Pentecostal friends and from what I understand out of them, they think that they can TELL God what gift to give them and he will give it to them (the only gift they seem to think is worth having though is tougues). They want so have the "evidence" that they have the Spirit in them. I have the evidence, but He just shows Himself in my life differently. Because I have different gifts than others, I have stopped worrying about what I don't have, and I concentrate on what I do have.



37818 -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/5/2006 11:15:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SmileyTish

This is STILL going on? This being said from one of the original arguers...again. My opinion for those who are just joining in...

1. Tougues are for today, but not everyone has that gift.

2. Tougues are not a "springboard" to the other gifts (nothing in the New or Old Testements reveals that to me).

3. Instead of trying to get everyone to focus on that one gift, shouldn't the church be focusing on developing all the gifts that people do have?

Sorry, but I have a lot of Pentecostal friends and from what I understand out of them, they think that they can TELL God what gift to give them and he will give it to them (the only gift they seem to think is worth having though is tougues). They want so have the "evidence" that they have the Spirit in them. I have the evidence, but He just shows Himself in my life differently. Because I have different gifts than others, I have stopped worrying about what I don't have, and I concentrate on what I do have.


It was Pentecostal brothers who influinced me to believe in the operation of the modern gift of tongues. But nevertheless there were some issues that were bothersome. ( about 1968)

Later, while explaining why other christians do not believe in the modern operation of the gift of tongues, it came to me, that the modern gift of tongues was not operational after all. (about 1972)

My observations.

Typically those who believe in the current operation of the biblical gift of tongues believe that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is a separate action from salvation.

Typically those who believe the biblical gift of tongue is no longer in operation, believe that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is what one recieves when on is saved.

There are exceptions to these two points. Generally these two points are true.

I always believed that the receiving the Holy Spirit was the baptism of the Holy Spirit. I have always believe this from my study of holy scripture.

There are other points of difference.

But just one more. That the perfect of 1 Corinthians 13: is typically held to be the person of Jesus Christ by those who hold the gift of tongues is currently operational.

Typically those who do not hold the biblical gift is operational, hold that which is perfect refers to the close of the perfect word of God as the NT canon.

My personal view is similar to the latter. I believe the that which is perfect occured and resulted in the close of the canon. But it is not my view that the that which is perfect is the canon, directly. It is not. My view differs here. It was that second explanation that I was giving as to why some did not today believe the biblical gift of tongues was operational that I saw what I have now come to understand and believe.

My further observation regarding the latter view, those who presist in holding the modern gift of tongues is the now operational biblical gift of tongues, seem to be incapable to understand the underlying issue of the closed canon. Let alone the view I hold.

Prove that the perfect of 1 Corinthians 13: is in fact Jesus Christ. Please do this. Thanks.

To the best of your ability explain how and why the modern gift of tongues must be operational today. And the importance of a closed canon on that basis. Thanks.



rapturefish -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/6/2006 7:47:20 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbbaab44

quote:

ORIGINAL: rapturefish
1 Corinthians 14:14ff
For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. What am I to do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will pray with my mind also; I will sing praise with my spirit, but I will sing with my mind also.

This suggests that praying in a tongue is to pray with one's spirit, and that this is different to praying with one's mind. Therefore one can pray by way of the mind, and one can also pray by way of their spirit, which is not by way of the mind, ie through tongues. It is interesting to note that it is one's spirit (small s) that prays but it is the Holy Spirit that enables it.

Missed my point totally. should you pray in anything but from our spirit OR Holy Spirit? And it sounds like his mind hinders the Holy Spirit by holding back tongues(the Holy Spirit praying for him). It is every word out of our mouth that has to be reinterpreted to God by the Holy Spirit anyways. Basically it is the Holy Spirit that enables all of our spirit's words to reach God. So what's the difference between: when we have the words to say, or as prayer languge people say: The holy Spirit has the words to say. because the HS has to reinterpret everything we say according to God's will anyways.

PS It is only God's word or the HS that gives us the words to pray, and unfortunately our mind cannot express back the words a HOLY SPIRIT or a HOLY BOOK gives us to say. Thank goodness for our mediator that intercedes all our words.


Obviously I must've missed the point completely because I still don't see what the point being made is. [&:]

We pray in the normal way when our spirit is stirred to pray. It comes out by way of our minds - thinking what to say, putting it in words and saying it. God hears and responds. If we pray with our spirits, it is our spirit that is enabled to pray by the Holy Spirit to God in a way that is supernatural - our own minds cannot understand it but The Spirit of God does because He makes it possible.

The natural mind has its limits of expression, great as it is. The Holy Spirit that enables our spirit to pray (it's still us praying, not the Holy Spirit) enables us to pray beyond those natural limits. Does the Holy Spirit enable all prayer to happen, both natural and supernatural? With natural prayer it is our minds and our voices that enable prayer; with tongues the Holy Spirit becomes our intercessor. The Romans 8:26-27 verses talk about the Spirit interceding with groans too deep for words (for natural prayer - because in this situation we do not know what to pray for as we ought). This also talks about a distinction between natural prayer and a kind of prayer that is Spirit-enabled.

Both kinds of prayer work. But if I could pray more effectively in one way than the other, then that's even better. Rather than articulating our spirit's prayers into words, which are limited, and then those prayers reaching God, God's Spirit enables our prayer to be prayed in a way that bypasses the limits of the mind. Therefore it's preferable to pray in tongues. That is probably why Paul used it in his ministry and prayed in tongues more often than the Corinthians, and why he wished everyone could speak in tongues.



sunshinesoprano -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/6/2006 12:58:15 PM)

You know, this would be a wonderful discussion if I could actually make heads or tails of what either of the two major contributors are saying. Half of the time I can't figure out what's being said because the subjects and verbs don't line up and there are so many huge paragraphs it's hard to separate fact from the other stuff.

As I said before, I am really interested in this...maybe we need to start a tongues thread for dummies.[&:]



wacotton -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/7/2006 2:32:16 PM)

Dear sunshine, why don't you post your questions one at a time and I will try my best to give you an answer. God bless.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sunshinesoprano

You know, this would be a wonderful discussion if I could actually make heads or tails of what either of the two major contributors are saying. Half of the time I can't figure out what's being said because the subjects and verbs don't line up and there are so many huge paragraphs it's hard to separate fact from the other stuff.

As I said before, I am really interested in this...maybe we need to start a tongues thread for dummies.[&:]



sunshinesoprano -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/8/2006 9:17:01 AM)

Okay, Wacotton.

First question: Defend the idea that tongues is applicable for today without using typical Pentecostal rationale (I've read alot of this, by the way).

Second question: Does one HAVE to speak in tongues in order to be infilled by the Holy Spirit.

Third question: Defend the stance that there are two separate infillings of the Holy Spirit, one at salvation and one at the request of the believer for the "power" of the Spirit providing ample Biblical support.

More to come.

Thanks!



wacotton -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/9/2006 2:35:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sunshinesoprano

Okay, Wacotton.

First question: Defend the idea that tongues is applicable for today without using typical Pentecostal rationale (I've read alot of this, by the way).


I don't know what you consider "typical Pentecostal rationale" but I would say that you should be the one defending that it is no longer applicable for today. Just because one verse says that tongues "will cease" (future tense) does not mean that they have ceased. Also I believe the context of 1 Corinthians 13 shows "that which is perfect" is a person, namely Jesus Christ. Some say that tongues are no longer needed because we have the "perfect word of God" meaning the completed Bible but I contend that the people in Jesus day has the Perfect Word of God in flesh and still needed the spiritual gifts to be manifested before they would believe(many still did not believe). What makes the written word of God (Paul says the letter killeth) more powerful than the actual living presence of Jesus Christ in person? Also tongues are recorded in the Bible as a gift of the Holy Spirit and Paul even gives instruction as to their proper use within the assembly. Now why would God include these instructions on tongues in the scriptures if they were going to cease with the Apostles?



wacotton -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/9/2006 3:01:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sunshinesoprano

Second question: Does one HAVE to speak in tongues in order to be infilled by the Holy Spirit.


I do not believe a person has to pray in tongues to be saved but I do believe a person who is baptized with the Holy Spirit will be able to pray in tongues. When one is saved they receive the Holy Spirit into their hearts by faith. When one is baptized with the Holy Spirit they are immersed in the Holy Spirit. Salvation is like drinking a glass of water, the water representing the Holy Spirit, and being baptized with the Holy Spirit is like jumping into a swimming pool.

The context of 1 Corinthians 12 is ministry. All the gifts listed are gifts given for ministry. When it says “do all speak with tongues” it is referring to a ministry gift not a personal gift. One of the gifts listed in 1 Corinthians 12 is faith. Now the Bible is clear that we all need faith in order to be saved. This faith mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12 is above and beyond the faith we need for salvation. It is faith given in order to minister to others. It is similar with tongues. Tongues as a prayer language is when the Holy Spirit in a believer prays to God the Father. Tongues followed by an interpretation is when God the Father speaks to the church through the believer. Paul was addressing the later when he said “do all speak with tongues”.



wacotton -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/9/2006 3:31:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sunshinesoprano

Third question: Defend the stance that there are two separate infillings of the Holy Spirit, one at salvation and one at the request of the believer for the "power" of the Spirit providing ample Biblical support.


In John 20:22 Jesus breathed on the disciples and said, "receive ye the Holy Ghost" and then in Acts 2 the same disciples are baptized with the Holy Spirit. Now some try to say that John 20:22 was prophetically referring to what would happen in Acts 2 but the Greek grammer makes that impossible. The tense for the Greek word for "receive" in John 20:22 is Aorist Imperative which means it was a command that occured at that place and time. Also the fact that Jesus breathed on them is significant because it is very sybolic of the new birth. In Genesis God breathed the breath of life into Adam and in Ezekiel 37 God commanded the prophet to prophesy to the wind to "breath on these slain, that they may live".

John 20:21-22
21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.
22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:

Ezekiel 37:9
Then said he unto me, Prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live.

Every Gospel records John the Baptist making a distinction between water baptism and the baptism with the Holy Spirit. Jesus himself also makes this distinction in Acts 1:5. I say this to show that water baptism is not the same as baptism with the Holy Spirit. In Luke 24:49 Jesus tells the disciples to wait for the promise of the Father and then in Acts 1:4-5 He says that the promise of the Father is the Baptism with the Holy Spirit which Peter confirms in Acts 2:33.

Luke 3:16
John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire:
Luke 24:49
And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.
John 1:4, 5
4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.
5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.
Acts 2:33
Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.



sunshinesoprano -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/9/2006 4:55:53 PM)

Thanks for your info. I didn't mean to be aggressive, I guess I'm just used to writing essays!

I appreciate your help!



jbbaab44 -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/10/2006 10:04:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: wacotton

quote:

ORIGINAL: sunshinesoprano

Second question: Does one HAVE to speak in tongues in order to be infilled by the Holy Spirit.

Tongues followed by an interpretation is when God the Father speaks to the church through the believer. Paul was addressing the later when he said “do all speak with tongues”.

SINCE WHEN SHOULDN"T WE ALLOW GOD TO SPEAK THROUGH US?????!!!!!!!!! God speaks through us regardless of a tongue. Very invalid point to support your idea!! Our words in tongues are just as important as words without the babble.

In order for someone to be healed you need someone with the gift of healing.
In order for needs to be met you need someone with the gift of giving.
In order for learning you need someone with the gift of teaching/ or understanding.
In order for miracles to happen you need the gift of faith.

IN ORDER FOR LANGUAGE BARRIERS TO BE BROKEN YOU NEED THE GIFT OF TONGUES



sunshinesoprano -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/10/2006 11:57:25 AM)

jb:
Okay, but what if there are no language barriers? I'm playing devil's advocate here, too, because I want to understand the need. I understand it as a prayer language, and the contention is that it filters out known language connotations and limitaitons but..

If we're all speakin' English, what's the need?



jbbaab44 -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/10/2006 3:50:56 PM)

The only need others have told me for a prayer language is for edification. but what i say is, if other gifts are greater, then they also have greater edification. i once prayed for the gift of prayer language, because of the results someone told me it had(ie: the person felt so close to God when they had the experience) Then it clicked while I Cor 13. Love, mercy, giving, teaching, prophecy, understanding are all greater than tongues, and the greatest is love. I no longer cared for the gift of tongues. Other gifts (if they are actualy greater, and they are) will give me (and also others) more edification thana personal prayer language can. . .which by the way doesn't satisfy the church bodies(collective) which was the problem in I Cor 14.

There is no support for using tongues personally without understanding. Were the ones that need understanding, not God. He doesn't need audible words to understand us, he created us.

I have better edification through other gifts. It is the infilling of the HS that sends us the comfort, not the tongues. Just as it was the infilling of the HS that engaged the disples on the day of pentecost, and not the cloven tongues of fire or spoken tongues. They are for a sign.

Question: Why are cloven tongues of fire and spoken tongues mentioned as signs of the Baptism of the HS and only spoken tongues are still around?



manwe -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/10/2006 6:50:57 PM)

pentecostals learned long ago the missionary tongues is about as effective as missionary dating. They went thinking they had been supernaturally empowered to some foriegn language only to be severely let down when they got there. Howard Goss is a prime example. He believed his tongues was Bengali, so he headed off to India the evangelise the Begali people only to find when he got there he was wrong wrong wrong!

So the idea that tongues is for missions has long be discarded.



LoyalGypsy -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/10/2006 9:11:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbbaab44


Question: Why are cloven tongues of fire and spoken tongues mentioned as signs of the Baptism of the HS and only spoken tongues are still around?



Cut and Paste

Jesus says that those who believe in Him will "speak in new tongues" (Mark 16:17).

The word "new" means appearing for the first time. No one had spoken these languages before.

Contrary to bad theology tongues is not an ability given to preach the gospel in the language of foreigners.

This would make tongues "old" languages.

It is only appropriate that those of the “new birth” should speak “new tongues”.

It is natural and normal to speak in the language of your birth.
We are born again from above, therefore we should speak the language from above--that language is called "new tongues."
End




Mark 16 :
9 Now when He rose early on the first day of the week, He appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom He had cast seven demons. 10 She went and told those who had been with Him, as they mourned and wept. 11 And when they heard that He was alive and had been seen by her, they did not believe. 12 After that, He appeared in another form to two of them as they walked and went into the country. 13 And they went and told it to the rest, but they did not believe them either.
14 Later He appeared to the eleven as they sat at the table; and He rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen.

15 And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.
17 And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues;
18 they will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover."



http://www.religioustolerance.org/tongues1.htm


If one takes notice Jesus rebuked them for “not believing” twice in verse 11, 14 and he uses the word “because they did not believe” those “who had” seen him” and further goes and uses the word believe 4 times and signs that would “follow” them

Wisdom Key:
Mary who had seen him in one form, the other 2 in another form, perhaps to those who do not believe both Mary and the other 2, to them, they seemed to be speaking in tongues.
Ps 31:20
You shall hide them in the secret place of Your presence From the plots of man; You shall keep them secretly in a pavilion From the strife of “tongues” = (unbelief)

He said, “they will”, =they'll (the signs) =: they will: they shall, “follow” those who believe

But that is only if you believe, they (signs) will.

Is it commandment or a choice? To believe that is?

"Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.

Go into the entire world and preach “the gospel” to every “creature” creature = (non believers)

The Lord never said Go into the entire world to preach tongues because the creatures will have no idea what you are doing.
In fact this is what Paul is saying
1Co 14:21….
Therefore tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers; but prophesying is not for unbelievers but for those who believe

1Co 13:1
Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love,
I have become sounding: POMPOUS, IMPOSING brass (minus the br) = brazen self-assurance: GALL
or a clanging "to cause to clang" = which means repetitive noise, “the same” thing or “words” over and over "cymbal. Makes a loud crashing sound
Sounds like church today…..

Tongues and all the above “that they shall” do, as signs, is not related to verse 16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved.

The key of tongues, casting out demons, laying hands on the sick is “you must believe”, that you can, then you will.









Loyal Gypsy



rcjames -> RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread (3/10/2006 10:11:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: manwe
So the idea that tongues is for missions has long be discarded.


Maybe not completely discarded.

Around 20 years ago I was a missionary in Mexico. I had been there for about 15 years and of course my Spanish was fluent. I was walking across the Yucatan Peninsula (took 3 months) and I came upon a small Mayan village in the jungle. Much to my surprise there was a thatch hut with a cross on it and as I approached it I could hear singing, but did not understand it, for it was done in a local Mayan Dialect.

I sat down on the dirt floor with my back to the back wall and began praying. After a few moments I began to speak (pray?) in tongues, and then something really strange happened. In the front of the building was one man (I later found out he was a Pastor) and about a half dozen ladies in their typical white dresses. As I began to pray (speak?) in tongues the ladies all came back to where I was and were most joyful; patting me on the back and generally praising God. I could tell they were genuinely ecstatic about what I was saying even though I could not understand a word they said except “Halleluiah”

The Pastor spoke to me in a language that I did not understand, and when he realized I did not understand he switched to Spanish (he was bi-lingual, the ladies were not). He ask me how in the world did I learn how to speak the Chichen Itza dialect of Mayan. I told him I couldn't.

It seems that when I was speaking (praying?) in tongues that I was blessing the group and praying for the men of the tribe who were out on a hunting expedition, praying for the success of the hunt, the men's safety, and I did all this in perfect dialect pronunciation of their language.

A year later I retuned with my family and we lived with those wonderful people for 18 months. I learned the language and the Pastor and I did much outreach to the other small villages in the jungle.

Why that incident happened, I do not know. To the best of my knowledge in over 20 years on the mission fields around the world it did not happen again.

Thanks
RC



Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI